Card Range To Study

13 Cards in this Set

Front

Back

A buys a house over the internet. A hires B to paint the house. B finds X while painting. Who owns X?

In buying the house, A took control and possession of the real property and the personal property within in it. B does not have proper possession over A, even though A never entered the property. A is presumed to be in CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION of X.

Maid finds wallet in drawer while cleaning rooms. Who owns the wallet?

The OWNER EMPLOYER wins because the maid is acting within her scope of employment when object found and room is more private than bathroom.

Contractor hired to clean pond finds ring embedded at the bottom of the pond. Who owns the ring and why?

OWNER WINS. Because 1. right was attached to the land; 2. contractors access to locus in quo is for a limited purpose; 3. contractor seen as agent to owner.

Tenant finds pre-historic boat embedded in land. Who owns the boat?

OWNER WINS. Because 1. right was attached to the land; 2. contractors access to locus in quo is for a limited purpose; 3. contractor seen as agent to owner.

Customer picks up small parcel lying on the floor of a store. Who owns the parcel if the original owner cannot be found?

FINDER WINS because lost property goes to finder.

D has deed to a land. D actually only possess the bottom half. If no paper title to the whole land, then how much does he have along with his adverse possession?

If no paper, then adverse possession only gained in bottom half; but if have paper, then title for the whole lots. So, after SOL runs, w/color of title even if only bottom 1/2 possessed, D gets ownership of top 1/2 even if D never went to top 1/2.

X is occupying blackacre & in possession. Y has paper title. SOL has run. What causes of action can be brought against who and to what kind of successes?

1. y can no longer sue using the cause of action of ejectment; 2. Y still owns blackacre, just doesn’t have a right to possession; 3. X's right of possession dies with him. 4. Y can sue X, but he wont prevail. X can sue Y for title. Court an give title to the X, the possessor, and Y's paper title gets cancelled. X gets a new original title.

A & B own adjacent lots. A erects a fence on B's lot 3 feet beyond the boundary line on what she mistakenly assumes to be the true boundary dividing the lots. A thereafter acts as the owner of all the land on her aside of the fence for the statute period and subsequently acquires title by AP. B ethend discovers in a survey A's mistake. Be tells A, and A, "to avoid the hassle," tears down the fence and erects a new fence on the original true boundary line. 3 years later, A changes her mind and sues to eject B from the 3 feet. WAS THERE AP IN A?

1. ACTUAL & EXCLUSIVE: yes, A used 3 feet as an owner would; 2. OPEN & NOTORIOUS? Probably, but can say you assume form this pont forward that it was since it was visible and obvious to B that A was claiming the 3 feet; 3. ADVERSE & UNDER CLAIM OF RIGHT? (objective test: yes) (good faith and under claim of right test "I thought I owned it" Yes.) (Hostile & under Claim of right test "I thought I didn't own and meant to take it" = No). 4. CONTINUOUS Yes, fence up thought statutory period. Tearing down fence after SOL was a non-event until the SOL ran again, Because then B would have regained title by AP.

(Assume a 10 year SOL) In 1991, A enters adversely upon Blackacre, owned by O. In 1998, B tells A, "Get out of here, I'm taking over." A feeling threatened leaves, and B enters into possession. QUESTIONS: In 2001, who owns blackacre? Can O eject B? Can A eject B?

1.In 2001, who owns Blackacre? O, theirs no privity we choose to recognize; 2. Can O eject B? Yes, B cannot pick up A's abandoned AP. 3. Can A eject B? Yes, title is relative. We have 2 people w/claims we are prepared to recognize, O's and A's. Unless A abandoned it. A unlike O can abandon his claim, B/c A only and an inchoate title under the doctrine of AP.

(Assume a 10 year SOL). ADVERSE POSSESSION PROBLEM: In 1998, A left under threat of force but came back 1/2 year later and recovers possession from B. If O does nothing, will A own Blackacre 10 years former the date of his entry in 1991, or 10 years and 6 months from the date of A's entry, or in 2008?

No sound explanation, but the answer is 10 years and 6 months. Courts condier A's absence as having no legal consequences.

STATUTE: AP happens in 21 years unless the persion is insane or a minority or imprisoned. The person or anyone claiming from or by under such persons after expiration of 21 years from the time the cause of action accrues, may bring action within 10 years after such disabilty is removed. FACTS: O is owner in 1976, and A enters adversely on May 1, 1976. The age of majority is 18. QUESTION: When would the AP acquire title under the statute if 1. O is insane in 1976. O dies insane and inetestate in 1999. (a) O's heir H, is under no disablity in 1999? (b) O's heir, H, is age 6 in 1999. 2. O has no disality in 1976. O dies intestate in 1994. O's heir H, is age 2 in 1994. 4. O disappears in 1989 and is not heard from again. You represent B, who isehs to buy from A, what advice do you give B When does teh state run in normal circumstnaces? O disappears in 1989. How old is O? How old will O be when he dies?

1. O IS INSANE IN 1976. O DIES INSANE AND INTESTATE IN 1999. O'S HEIR H IS UNDER NO DIABLITY IN 1999. A: 1999 + 10 = 2009. 10 year SOL started runing when O died, when his dailbity ended. O cant bring an action since he is dead. W/o disablity, sol woud ave run 1976 + 21 = 1997. O'S HEIR, H, IS AGE 6 IN 1999 A: 1999+10 =May 1, 2009. No tacking of disabliites, so H's ageiin 1999 is irrevelenat. H is not entitled to bring such action because H didnet own land at teh time, so had no cause of action. Heir wasnt even born yet when cause thereof accured. 2. O HAS NO DISABLITY IN 1976. O DIES INTESTATE IN 1994. O'S HEIR H IS AGE 2 IN 1994. A: 1976 + 21 = 1997. SOL states running in 1976 and rusn in 1997 because O had no disablity. 3. O IS AGE 5 IN 1976. IN 1986, O BECOMES MENTALLY ILL AND O DIES INTESTTAE IN 2001. O'S EHIR H IS UNDER NO DISABLITY. DOES THE AP AQURE IN 1997, 199 OR SOME OTHER DATE? HOWA RE O'S INTERSTS PROTECTED. a: 1976 + 13 (O's first disablity ends) + 10 (extended disablity SOL runs ) = 1999. 4. O DISAPPEARS IN 1989 AND IS NOT HEARD FROM AGAIN. YOU REPRESTN B WHO WISHES TO BUY FROM A WHAT ADVICE DO YOU GIVE B? Pay less. if something is not perfect, tehn you pay less but buy special title insruacne or bring on a quiet title action in rem. State uns in normal circumsntacseds in 1997. HOW OLD IS O? worst case schenario. O was 13 in 1989 (only one day old in 1976) then SOl woudl run in 1989 + 5 yeras to majorty + 10 + 2014. HOW OLD WILL O BE WHEN HE DIES just add 10 and the maximum year that he lives to.

Suppose O, while wearing a wristwatch, hands A a signed writing saying: "I hereby gives A the wristwatch I am wearing." Is this a valid gift?

No, what can be handed over MUST be handed over. If X gave Y a watch by handing it over along w/ a piece of paper that purported to transfer the watch to Y, the piece of paper would have no meaning, or it would serve as a mere historical record of the manual transfer. Maybe if someone stopped you on the street, it might serve as some purpose for proof; but, as far as were concerned, it has no meaning in regards to INTER VIVOS gift of personality

X wants to give Y a lion. How would X do it right?

1. By deed. X, donor, hands over to Y, donee, a grant paper (with all the appropriate requirements, like seals, witness signature etc. ) that says " I grant thee one lion". 2. DELIVERY OF THE THING, THE LION, THE CHATTEL. --ACTUAL DELIVER: Go to the lions cage and cook up a little ceremony where X talks up to gage with done and says "I give thee this lion" and , have done touch lion's tail while its sleeping. SYMBOLIC DELIVERY have picture of la lion, a mini lion, etc, and call it a symbol of the lion. CONSTRUCTIVE give done a key to the cage.